Category Archives: Market Trends

What to expect in US healthcare in 2024 and beyond

Posted on by • Posted in ACA, Cost Management, Cost Reduction, Health Insurance Industry, Health Policy, Inflation Reduction Act, Labor Spend Management, Market Consolidation, Market Outlook, Market Trends, Medicaid, Medicaid Eligibility, Medicare 340B Drug Discount Program, Medicare Advantage, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Margin Drivers, Pharmaceutical Industry, Transformational Change, Value Based Care Model, Value-Based Contracting, Value-Based Healthcare • Leave a comment
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/what-to-expect-in-us-healthcare-in-2024-and-beyond?stcr=FEFACC03D40F492EBD8401B5DCEEB6C3&cid=other-eml-alt-mip-mck&hlkid=2d8461c861f644cdb13cae55b6af9283&hctky=9502524&hdpid=edd3998f-a0c6-45fa-86c6-b0cd71574e4d

A new perspective on how technology, transformation efforts, and other changes have affected payers, health systems, healthcare services and technology, and pharmacy services.

The acute strain from labor shortages, inflation, and endemic COVID-19 on the healthcare industry’s financial health in 2022 is easing. Much of the improvement is the result of transformation efforts undertaken over the last year or two by healthcare delivery players, with healthcare payers acting more recently. Even so, health-system margins are lagging behind their financial performance relative to prepandemic levels. Skilled nursing and long-term-care profit pools continue to weaken. Eligibility redeterminations in a strong employment economy have hurt payers’ financial performance in the Medicaid segment. But Medicare Advantage and individual segment economics have held up well for payers.

As we look to 2027, the growth of the managed care duals population (individuals who qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare) presents one of the most substantial opportunities for payers. On the healthcare delivery side, financial performance will continue to rebound as transformation efforts, M&A, and revenue diversification bear fruit. Powered by adoption of technology, healthcare services and technology (HST) businesses, particularly those that offer measurable near-term improvements for their customers, will continue to grow, as will pharmacy services players, especially those with a focus on specialty pharmacy.

Below, we provide a perspective on how these changes have affected payers, health systems, healthcare services and technology, and pharmacy services, and what to expect in 2024 and beyond.

The fastest growth in healthcare may occur in several segments

We estimate that healthcare profit pools will grow at a 7 percent CAGR, from $583 billion in 2022 to $819 billion in 2027. Profit pools continued under pressure in 2023 due to high inflation rates and labor shortages; however, we expect a recovery beginning in 2024, spurred by margin and cost optimization and reimbursement-rate increases.

Several segments can expect higher growth in profit pools:

  • Within payer, Medicare Advantage, spurred by the rapid increase in the duals population; the group business, due to recovery of margins post-COVID-19 pandemic; and individual
  • Within health systems, outpatient care settings such as physician offices and ambulatory surgery centers, driven by site-of-care shifts
  • Within HST, the software and platforms businesses (for example, patient engagement and clinical decision support)
  • Within pharmacy services, with specialty pharmacy continuing to experience rapid growth

On the other hand, some segments will continue to see slow growth, including general acute care and post-acute care within health systems, and Medicaid within payers (Exhibit 1).

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/healthcare%20systems%20and%20services/our%20insights/what%20to%20expect%20in%20us%20healthcare%20in%202024%20and%20beyond/svgz-what-to-expect-2024-ex1-v4.svgz?cq=50&cpy=Center
Exhibit 1

Several factors will likely influence shifts in profit pools. Two of these are:

Change in payer mix. Enrollment in Medicare Advantage, and particularly the duals population, will continue to grow. Medicare Advantage enrollment has grown historically by 9 percent annually from 2019 to 2022; however, we estimate the growth rate will reduce to 5 percent annually from 2022 to 2027, in line with the latest Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) enrollment data.1 Finally, the duals population enrolled in managed care is estimated to grow at more than a 9 percent CAGR from 2022 through 2027.

We also estimate commercial segment profit pools to rebound as EBITDA margins likely return to historical averages by 2027. Growth is likely to be partially offset by enrollment changes in the segment, prompted by a shift from fully insured to self-insured businesses that could accelerate as employers seek to cut costs if the economy slows. Individual segment profit pools are estimated to expand at a 27 percent CAGR from 2022 to 2027 as enrollment rises, propelled by enhanced subsidies, Medicaid redeterminations, and other potential favorable factors (for example, employer conversions through the Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangement offered by the Affordable Care Act); EBITDA margins are estimated to improve from 2 percent in 2022 to 5 to 7 percent in 2027. On the other hand, Medicaid enrollment could decline by about ten million lives over the next five years based on our estimates, given recent legislation allowing states to begin eligibility redeterminations (which were paused during the federal public health emergency declared at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic2).

Accelerating value-based care (VBC). Based on our estimates, 90 million lives will be in VBC models by 2027, from 43 million in 2022. This expansion will be fueled by an increase in commercial VBC adoption, greater penetration of Medicare Advantage, and the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) model in Medicare fee-for-service. Also, substantial growth is expected in the specialty VBC model, where penetration in areas like orthopedics and nephrology could more than double in the next five years.

VBC models are undergoing changes as CMS updates its risk adjustment methodology and as models continue to expand beyond primary care to other specialties (for example, nephrology, oncology, and orthopedics). We expect established models that offer improvements in cost and quality to continue to thrive. The transformation of VBC business models in response to pressures from the current changes could likely deliver outsized improvement in cost and quality outcomes. The penetration of VBC business models is likely to lead to shifts in health delivery profit pools, from acute-care settings to other sites of care such as ambulatory surgical centers, physician offices, and home settings.

Payers: Government segments are expected to be 65 percent larger than commercial segments by 2027

In 2022, overall payer profit pools were $60 billion. Looking ahead, we estimate EBITDA to grow to $78 billion by 2027, a 5 percent CAGR, as the market recovers and approaches historical trends. Drivers are likely to be margin recovery of the commercial segment, inflation-driven incremental premium rate rises, and increased participation in managed care by the duals population. This is likely to be partially offset by margin compression in Medicare Advantage due to regulatory pressures (for example, risk adjustment, decline in the Stars bonus, and technical updates) and membership decline in Medicaid resulting from the expiration of the public health emergency.

We estimate increased labor costs and administrative expenses to reduce payer EBITDA by about 60 basis points in 2023. In addition, health systems are likely to push for reimbursement rate increases (up to about 350 to 400 basis-point incremental rate increases from 2023 to 2027 for the commercial segment and about 200 to 250 basis points for the government segment), according to McKinsey analysis and interviews with external experts.3

Our estimates also suggest that the mix of payer profit pools is likely to shift further toward the government segment (Exhibit 2). Overall, the profit pools for this segment are estimated to be about 65 percent greater than the commercial segment by 2027 ($36 billion compared with $21 billion). This shift would be a result of increasing Medicare Advantage penetration, estimated to reach 52 percent in 2027, and likely continued growth in the duals segment, expanding EBITDA from $7 billion in 2022 to $12 billion in 2027.

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/healthcare%20systems%20and%20services/our%20insights/what%20to%20expect%20in%20us%20healthcare%20in%202024%20and%20beyond/svgz-what-to-expect-2024-ex2-v3.svgz?cq=50&cpy=Center
Exhibit 2

Profit pools for the commercial segment declined from $18 billion in 2019 to $15 billion in 2022. We now estimate the commercial segment’s EBITDA margins to regain historical levels by 2027, and profit pools to reach $21 billion, growing at a 7 percent CAGR from 2022 to 2027. Within this segment, a shift from fully insured to self-insured businesses could accelerate in the event of an economic slowdown, which prompts employers to pay greater attention to costs. The fully insured group enrollment could drop from 50 million in 2022 to 46 million in 2027, while the self-insured segment could increase from 108 million to 113 million during the same period.

Health systems: Transformation efforts help accelerate EBITDA recovery

In 2023, health-system profit pools continued to face substantial pressure due to inflation and labor shortages. Estimated growth was less than 5 percent from 2022 to 2023, remaining below prepandemic levels. Health systems have undertaken major transformation and cost containment efforts, particularly within the labor force, helping EBITDA margins recover by up to 100 basis points; some of this recovery was also volume-driven.

Looking ahead, we estimate an 11 percent CAGR from 2023 to 2027, or total EBITDA of $366 billion by 2027 (Exhibit 3). This reflects a rebound from below the long-term historical average in 2023, spurred by transformation efforts and potentially higher reimbursement rates. We anticipate that health systems will likely seek reimbursement increases in the high single digits or higher upon contract renewals (or more than 300 basis points above previous levels) in response to cost inflation in recent years.

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/healthcare%20systems%20and%20services/our%20insights/what%20to%20expect%20in%20us%20healthcare%20in%202024%20and%20beyond/svgz-what-to-expect-2024-ex3-v4.svgz?cq=50&cpy=Center
Exhibit 3

Measures to tackle rising costs include improving labor productivity and the application of technological innovation across both administration and care delivery workflows (for example, further process standardization and outsourcing, increased use of digital care, and early adoption of AI within administrative workflows such as revenue cycle management). Despite these measures, 2027 industry EBITDA margins are estimated to be 50 to 100 basis points lower than in 2019, unless there is material acceleration in performance transformation efforts.

There are some meaningful exceptions to this overall outlook for health systems. Although post-acute-care profit pools could be severely affected by labor shortages (particularly nurses), other sites of care might grow (for example, non-acute and outpatient sites such as physician offices and ambulatory surgery centers). We expect accelerated adoption of VBC to drive growth.

HST profit pools will grow in technology-based segments

HST is estimated to be the fastest-growing sector in healthcare. In 2021, we estimated HST profit pools to be $51 billion. In 2022, according to our estimates, the HST profit pool shrank to $49 billion, reflecting a contracting market, wage inflation pressure, and the drag of fixed-technology investment that had not yet fulfilled its potential. Looking ahead, we estimate a 12 percent CAGR in 2022–27 due to the long-term underlying growth trend and rebound from the pandemic-related decline (Exhibit 4). With the continuing technology adoption in healthcare, the greatest acceleration is likely to happen in software and platforms as well as data and analytics, with 15 percent and 22 percent CAGRs, respectively.

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/healthcare%20systems%20and%20services/our%20insights/what%20to%20expect%20in%20us%20healthcare%20in%202024%20and%20beyond/svgz-what-to-expect-2024-ex4a-v4.svgz?cq=50&cpy=Center
Exhibit 4

In 2023, we observed an initial recovery in the HST market, supported by lower HST wage pressure and continued adoption of technology by payers and health systems searching for ways to become more efficient (for example, through automation and outsourcing).

Three factors account for the anticipated recovery and growth in HST. First, we expect continued demand from payers and health systems searching to improve efficiency, address labor challenges, and implement new technologies (for example, generative AI). Second, payers and health systems are likely to accept vendor price increases for solutions delivering measurable improvements. Third, we expect HST companies to make operational changes that will improve HST efficiency through better technology deployment and automation across services.

Pharmacy services will continue to grow

The pharmacy market has undergone major changes in recent years, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the establishment of partnerships across the value chain, and an evolving regulatory environment. Total pharmacy dispensing revenue continues to increase, growing by 9 percent to $550 billion in 2022,4 with projections of a 5 percent CAGR, reaching $700 billion in 2027.5 Specialty pharmacy is one of the fastest growing subsegments within pharmacy services and accounts for 40 percent of prescription revenue6; this subsegment is expected to reach nearly 50 percent of prescription revenue in 2027 (Exhibit 5). We attribute its 8 percent CAGR in revenue growth to increases in utilization and pricing as well as the continued expansion of pipeline therapies (for example, cell and gene therapies and oncology and rare disease therapies) and expect that the revenue growth will be partially offset by reimbursement pressures, specialty generics, and increased adoption of biosimilars. Specialty pharmacy dispensers are also facing an evolving landscape with increased manufacturer contract pharmacy pressures related to the 340B Drug Pricing Program. With restrictions related to size and location of contract pharmacies that covered entities can use, the specialty pharmacy subsegment has seen accelerated investment in hospital-owned pharmacies.

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/healthcare%20systems%20and%20services/our%20insights/what%20to%20expect%20in%20us%20healthcare%20in%202024%20and%20beyond/svgz-what-to-expect-2024-ex5-v3.svgz?cq=50&cpy=Center
Exhibit 5

Retail and mail pharmacies continue to face margin pressure and a contraction of profit pools due to reimbursement pressure, labor shortages, inflation, and a plateauing of generic dispensing rates.7 Many chains have recently announced8 efforts to rationalize store footprints while continuing to augment additional services, including the provision of healthcare services.

Over the past year, there has also been increased attention to broad-population drugs such as GLP-1s (indicated for diabetes and obesity). The number of patients meeting clinical eligibility criteria for these drugs is among the largest of any new drug class in the past 20 to 30 years. The increased focus on these drugs has amplified conversations about care and coverage decisions, including considerations around demonstrated adherence to therapy, utilization management measures, and prescriber access points (for example, digital and telehealth services). As we look ahead, patient affordability, cost containment, and predictability of spending will likely remain key themes in the sector. The Inflation Reduction Act is poised to change the Medicare prescription Part D benefit, with a focus on reducing beneficiary out-of-pocket spending, negotiating prices for select drugs, and incentivizing better management of high-cost drugs. These changes, coupled with increased attention to broad-population drugs and the potential of high-cost therapies (such as cell and gene therapies), have set the stage for a shift in care and financing models.

The US healthcare industry faced demanding conditions in 2023, including continuing high inflation rates, labor shortages, and endemic COVID-19. However, the industry has adapted. We expect accelerated improvement efforts to help the industry address its challenges in 2024 and beyond, leading to an eventual return to historical-average profit margins.

Healthcare 2024: The 10 Themes that will Dominate Discussion

Posted on by • Posted in Accountable Care Organization (ACO), Antitrust, Board, Board Effectiveness, C-Suite, Distrust, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Market Consolidation, Market Trends, Market Uncertainty, Non-Profit Healthcare Industry, Physician Independence, Public Health, Workforce Issues, Workforce Strategy • Leave a comment
Healthcare 2024: The 10 Themes that will Dominate Discussion

The U.S. health system has experienced three major shifts since the pandemic that set the stage for its future:

  • From trust to distrust: Every poll has chronicled the decline in trust and confidence in government: Congress, the Presidency, the FDA and CDC and even the Supreme Court are at all-time lows. Thus, lawmaking about healthcare is met with unusual hostility.
  • From big to bigger: The market has consistently rewarded large cap operators, giving advantage to national and global operators in health insurance, information technology and retail health. In response, horizontal consolidation via mergers and acquisitions has enabled hospitals, medical practices, law firms and consultancies to get bigger, attracting increased attention from regulators. Access to private capital and investor confidence is a major differentiator for major players in each sector.
  • From regulatory tailwinds to headwinds: in the last 3 years, regulators have forced insurers, hospitals and drug companies to disclose prices and change business practices deemed harmful to fair competition and consumer choice. Incumbent-unfriendly scrutiny has increased at both the state and federal levels including notable bipartisan support for industry-opposed legislation. It will continue as healthcare favor appears to have run its course.

Some consider these adverse; others opportunistic; all consider them profound. All concede the long-term destination of the U.S. health system is unknown. Against this backdrop, 2024 is about safe bets.

These 10 themes will be on the agenda for every organization operating in the $4.5 trillion U.S. healthcare market:

  1. Not for profit health: “Not-for-profit” designation is significant in healthcare and increasingly a magnet for unwelcome attention. Not-for-profit hospitals, especially large, diversified multi-hospital systems, will face increased requirements to justify their tax exemptions. Special attention will be directed at non-operating income activities involving partnerships with private equity and incentives used in compensating leaders. Justification for profits will take center stage in 2024 with growing antipathy toward organizations deemed to put profit above all else.
  2. Insurer coverage and business practices: State and federal regulators will impose regulatory constraints on insurer business practices that lend to consumer and small-business affordability issues.
  3. Workforce wellbeing: The pandemic hangover, sustained impact of inflation on consumer prices, increased visibility of executive compensation and heightened public support for the rank-and-file workers and means wellbeing issues must be significant in 2024.
  4. Board effectiveness: The composition, preparedness, compensation and independent judgement of Boards will attract media scrutiny; not-for-profit boards will get special attention in light of 2023 revelations in higher education.
  5. Employer-sponsored health benefits: The cost-effectiveness of employee health benefits coverage will prompt some industries and large, self-insured companies to pursue alternative strategies for attracting and maintaining a productive workforce. Direct contracting, on-site and virtual care will be key elements.
  6. Physician independence: With 20% of physicians in private equity-backed groups, and 50% in hospital employed settings, ‘corporatization’ will encounter stiff resistance from physicians increasingly motivated to activism believing their voices are unheard.
  7. Data driven healthcare: The health industry’s drive toward interoperability and transparency will will force policy changes around data (codes) and platform ownership, intellectual property boundaries, liability et al. Experience-based healthcare will be forcibly constrained by data-driven changes to processes and insights.
  8. Consolidation: The DOJ and FTC will expand their activism against vertical and horizontal consolidation that result in higher costs for consumers. Retrospective analyses of prior deals to square promises and actual results will be necessary.
  9. Public health: State and federal funding for public health programs that integrate with community-based health providers will be prioritized. The inadequacy of public health funding versus the relative adequacy of healthcare’s more lucrative services will be the centerpiece for health reforms.
  10. ACO 2.0: In Campaign 2024, abortion and the Affordable Care Act will be vote-getters for candidates favoring/opposing current policies. Calls to “Fix and Repair” the Affordable Care Act will take center stage as voters’ seek affordability and access remedies.

Every Board and C suite in U.S. healthcare will face these issues in 2024.

Will health system M&A soar or dive?

Posted on by • Posted in Academic Medical Center, Acquisition, Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Divestitures, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Innovation, Joint Venture, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Share, Market Trends, Mergers & Acquisitions • Leave a comment
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/will-health-system-m-a-soar-or-dive.html?origin=CFOE&utm_source=CFOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=2893H2397267F7G

The health system deal market heated up in 2023.

Big, industry-shaking acquisitions including Oakland, Calif.-based Kaiser Permanente’s purchase of Danville, Pa.-based Geisinger, could redefine healthcare delivery with an eye toward value. Regional deals, such as Detroit-based Henry Ford Health’s planned joint venture with Ascension Michigan and St. Louis-based BJC HealthCare’s plan to acquire Saint Luke’s Health System to create a $10 billion organization, have also made waves.

There were 18 hospital and health system transactions announced in the third quarter, up from 10 transactions over the same time period in 2022, according to Kaufman Hall’s third quarter M&A report. Financial pressures with inflation catapulting staffing and supply costs, and reimbursement rates growing much more slowly, have forced some systems to look for a buyer while others aim to increase market share.

Academic health systems are also seeking community partners at a higher rate than in the past, according to the Kaufman Hall report.

But not all announced deals have gone according to plan.

The Federal Trade Commission is scrutinizing deals more closely than ever before to ensure costs don’t increase after an acquisition in some cases. In other cases, the two partners aren’t able to agree upon the details after announcing their plans. The dissolved merger between Sioux Falls, S.D.-based Sanford Health and Minneapolis-based Fairview Health Services fell apart amid contention in Minnesota, and West Des Moines, Iowa-based UnityPoint Health’s plans to merge with Presbyterian Healthcare Services in Albuquerque, N.M., was halted without a publicly stated reason.

Will there be more or fewer health system deals in the next three years?

Seth Ciabotti, CEO of MSU Health Care at Michigan State University in East Lansing, thinks so, at least when it comes to academic medical centers.

“There will be more consolidation to mitigate risk,” he told Becker’s. “I believe we are heading down a path of having only a dozen or so non-academic medical centers/health systems being left in the near future in the U.S.”

Mark Behl, president and CEO of NorthBay Health in Fairfield, Calif., has a similar outlook for the next three years.

“I suspect we will see more mergers and acquisitions with a continued desire to grow larger and remain relevant,” he told Becker’s. “Independent regional health systems will fight for relevance, and sometimes survival.”

And health systems won’t be the only buyers. Private equity, health insurers and non-traditional owners are on the hunt for health systems. General Catalyst has strengthened its healthcare presence recently and announced it plans to acquire a system in the near future.

“I believe that over the next three years, the landscape of acquisitions, divestitures and joint ventures will continue to reshape the healthcare industry,” said Dennis Sunderman, system director of HR M&A, non-employee and provider services at CommonSpirit Health, told Becker’s. “Current and proposed legislation, the continued evolution of ownership groups, nonprofit, for profit, and private equity, and the drive to hire and retain exceptionally talented teams, will lead to new innovations and an enhanced focus on the associates affected by the transaction.”

Health systems will need to optimize their operations to expand their value-based care efforts and digital transformation, including telehealth and remote patient monitoring services. Not all systems have the expertise and resources to fully make this transition, but with the right partners and strategic alignments, they can accelerate care transformation.

“There will likely be more collaborations and partnerships to expand services and increase access versus brick and mortar acquisitions,” said Cliff Megerian, MD, CEO of University Hospitals in Cleveland. “Innovative thinking is critical for success and quite frankly survival in our industry, so health systems should already be investing in growing in-house expertise dedicated to ideating new models of care, but in three years, these efforts should be producing tangible results.”

Michelle Fortune, BSN, CEO of Atrium St. Luke’s Hospital in Columbus, N.C., pointed to recent collaborations between Mercy, Microsoft and Mayo Clinic as examples of how health systems can partner on important initiatives such as improved data sharing, generative AI, digital transformation and more.

“I expect to see an increase in collaborations and connections between health systems to a degree that has never existed before as part of the focus on bringing the right care to people across the full continuum, when and where they need it,” she said.

Kaufman Hall sees more minority ownership deals ahead, which allows the smaller system to maintain near-autonomy while benefiting from the resources of a larger system.

“Health systems are also engaging in creative transaction structures that allow partners to maintain their independence while building strategic alliances that enhance access to care,” the report notes. “Announced transactions in Q3 included [Charlottesville, Va.-based] UVA Health’s acquisition of 5% ownership interest in [Newport News, Va.-based] Riverside Health System as part of a strategic alliance design ‘to expand patient access to innovative care for complex medical conditions, transplantation, and the latest clinical trials.'”

Jefferson, Lehigh Valley Health plan to merge into 30-hospital system

Posted on by • Posted in Antitrust, Competition, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Share, Market Trends, Mergers & Acquisitions • Leave a comment
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-transactions-and-valuation/jefferson-lehigh-valley-health-plan-to-merge-into-30-hospital-system.html?origin=CEOE&utm_source=CEOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=2893H2397267F7G

Pennsylvania health systems Jefferson and Lehigh Valley Health Network have signed a non-binding letter of intent to combine.

Philadelphia-based Jefferson and Allentown, Pa.-based LVHN announced the letter Dec. 19 in a news release, with expectations to close the transaction in 2024. Combined, Jefferson and LVHN would form a system with 30 hospitals, more than 700 sites of care and more than 62,000 employees. 

Jefferson CEO Joseph Cacchione, MD, will serve as CEO of the expanded system — dubbed for now as Jefferson Enterprise — and LVHN President and CEO Brian Nester, DO, will serve as its executive vice president and COO. Dr. Nester will also serve as president of the legacy LVHN, reporting directly to Dr. Cacchione. An integrated board of trustees and leadership team will be made up of members from both systems, specifics of which are expected in the definitive agreement.

“The healthcare landscape and our communities’ needs are changing; it is critical leading systems evolve and make investments in the future of care and wellness — growing and protecting access to enhanced, affordable, high-quality and innovative care, particularly for historically underserved patients,” Dr. Cacchione said in the release. 

The merger is another development out of Jefferson, which has seen a year of change. Dr. Cacchione assumed the CEO post in September 2022, and the system has since welcomed a new president, CFO, and dean of its medical school and physicians group. Earlier this year, Jefferson rolled out a reorganization plan to operate as three divisions instead of five, which involved layoffs affecting executives and a later workforce reduction of about 400 positions.  

Cost-cutting has been in effect at LVHN, too. The 13-hospital system, which includes nearly 3,000 physicians and advanced practice clinicians, eliminated approximately 240 positions as part of restructuring this fall. 

“In Jefferson, we have found an ideal partner that shares our culture and commitment to excellence in clinical care and a learning environment, and that has done a fabulous job in establishing a highly successful health plan with a sharp focus on the well-being of Medicaid and Medicare beneficiaries,” Dr. Nester said. “The expertise derived from these operations is becoming a crucial competency for health systems to deliver on their mission, and Jefferson Health Plans will help drive improvements in health outcomes, especially in vulnerable populations. We are also very excited about the opportunity to expand academic and talent development programs that will further bolster our provider pipeline and enhance our ability to attract and retain top talent to the benefit of the communities we both serve.”

Providers threaten to leave MA networks amid contentious negotiations  

Posted on by • Posted in Health Insurance Denial, Health Insurance Industry, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Margin Improvement, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Share, Market Trends, Medicare Advantage, Payor Contracting • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/79ecc69aca80/the-weekly-gist-december-15-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

This week’s graphic highlights increasing tensions between health systems and Medicare Advantage (MA) plans as they battle over what providers see as unsatisfactory payment rates and insurer business practices.

On paper, many providers have negotiated rates with MA plans that are similar to traditional fee-for-service Medicare, but find MA patients are subject to more prior authorizations and denials, as well as delayed discharges to postacute care, which increases inpatient length of stay and hospital costs. 

A number of health system leaders have reported their revenue capture for MA patients dropped to roughly 80 percent of fee-for-service Medicare rates due to an increase in the mean length of stay for MA patients, caused by carriers narrowing postacute provider networks.

As a result, a growing number of health systems and medical groups have either already exited, or plan to exit, MA networks due to what they see as insufficient reimbursement. 

Health systems with a strong regional presence may be able to leverage their market share to get MA payers to play ball. But for health systems in more competitive markets, these hardline negotiation tactics run the risk of payers merely directing their patients elsewhere. 

Regardless of market dynamics, providers exiting insurance plans is extremely disruptive for patients, who won’t understand the dynamics of payer-provider negotiations—but will feel frustrated when they can’t see their preferred physicians.

BJC-Saint Luke’s $10B merger expected to close soon

Posted on by • Posted in Antitrust, Competition, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Health System, Horizontal Consolidation, Horizontal Integration, Horizontal Merger, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Trends, Mergers & Acquisitions, Regulatory Approvals • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/9b1afd2b4afb/the-weekly-gist-december-1-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

After signing a letter of intent in late May, St. Louis, MO-based BJC HealthCare and Kansas City, MO-based Saint Luke’s Health System announced on Wednesday that they have signed a definitive merger agreement, having received the necessary regulatory approvals. 

Based on opposite sides of the “Show-Me State,” the systems’ markets do not directly overlap. The merger, expected to close on Jan. 1, 2024, will create a $10B revenue, 28-hospital system spanning Missouri, southern Illinois, and eastern Kansas. The two systems plan to retain their respective brands and will be dually headquartered in St. Louis and Kansas City. 

The Gist: BJC and Saint Luke’s are following in the footsteps of other recent mergers involving large health systems with no geographic overlap, which regulators have allowed to move forward. However, recent history shows there’s more to closing a deal than just passing regulatory muster. 

Both the Sanford-Fairview and UnityPoint-Presbyterian mergers were called off earlier this year for non-regulatory reasons, including the concerns of local stakeholders.

Given the difficult financial environment and the growing threat of vertically integrated payers, health systems looking to pursue scale strategies must ensure they will actually realize the promise these combinations may hold.

The UAW Strike: What Healthcare Provider Organizations Should Watch

Posted on by • Posted in Consumerism, Financial Stewardship, Financial Strength, Financial Viability, Financially Distressed, Future, Future State, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Job Security, Labor Relations, Labor Shortages, Labor Spend Management, Labor Strike, Market Trends, Market Uncertainty, Scrutiny, Systemness, Uncertainty, Vulnerable • Leave a comment
The Keckley Report

Politicians, economists, auto industry analysts and main street business owners are closely watching the UAW strike that began at midnight last Thursday. Healthcare should also pay attention, especially hospitals. medical groups and facility operators where workforce issues are mounting.

Auto manufacturing accounts for 3% of America’s GDP and employs 2.2 million including 923,000 in frontline production. It’s high-profile sector industry in the U.S. with its most prominent operators aka “the Big Three” operating globally. Some stats:

  • The US automakers sold an estimated 13.75 million new and 36.2 million used vehicles in 2022.
  • The total value of the US car and automobile manufacturing market is $104.1 billion in 2023:
  • 9.2 million US vehicles were produced in 2021–a 4.5% increase from 2020 and 11.8% of the global total ranking only behind China in total vehicle production.
  • As of 2020, 91.5% of households report having access to at least one vehicle.
  • There were 290.8 million registered vehicles in the United States in 2022—21% of the global market.
  • Americans spend $698 billion annually on the combination of automobile loans and insurance.

By comparison, the healthcare services industry in the U.S.—those that operate facilities and services serving patients—employs 9 times more workers, is 29 times bigger ($104 Billion vs. $2.99 trillion/65% of total spend) and 6 times more integral in the overall economy (3% vs. 18.3% of GDP).  

Surprisingly, average hourly wages are similar ($31.07 in auto manufacturing vs. $33.12 in healthcare per BLS) though the range is wider in healthcare since it encompasses licensed professionals to unskilled support roles. There are other similarities:

  • Each industry enjoys ubiquitous presence in American household’ discretionary. spending.
  • Each faces workforce issues focused on pay parity and job security.
  • Each is threatened by unwelcome competitors, disruptive technologies and shifting demand complicating growth strategies.
  • Each is dependent on capital to remain competitive.
  • And each faces heightened media scrutiny and vulnerability to misinformation/disinformation as special interests seek redress or non-traditional competitors seek advantage.

Ironically, the genesis of the UAW dispute is not about wages; it is about job security as electric-powered vehicles that require fewer parts and fewer laborers become the mainstay of the sector. CEO compensation and the corporate profits of the Big Three are talking points used by union leaders to galvanize sympathizer antipathy of “corporate greed” and unfair treatment of frontline workers.

But the real issue is uncertainty about the future: will auto workers have jobs and health benefits in their new normal?

In healthcare services sectors—hospitals, medical groups, post-acute care facilities, home-care et al—the scenario is similar: workers face an uncertain future but significantly more complicated. Corporate greed, CEO compensation and workforce discontent are popular targets in healthcare services media coverage but the prominence of not-for-profit organizations in healthcare services obfuscates direct comparisons to for-profit organizations which represents less than a third of the services economy. For example, CEO compensation in NFPs—a prominent target of worker attention—is accounted differently for CEOs in investor-owned operations in which stock ownership is not treated as income until in options are exercised or shares sold. Annual 990 filings by NFPs tell an incomplete story nonetheless fodder for misinformation.

The competitive landscape and regulatory scrutiny for healthcare services are also more complicated for healthcare services. Unlike auto manufacturing where electric vehicles are forcing incumbents to change, there’s no consensus about what the new normal in U.S. healthcare services will be nor a meaningful industry-wide effort to define it. Each sector is defining its own “future state” based on questionable assumptions about competitors, demand, affordability, workforce requirements and more. Imagine an environmental scan in automakers strategy that’s mute on Tesla, or mass transit, Zoom, pandemic lock-downs or energy costs?

While the outlook for U.S. automakers is guardedly favorable, per Moody’s and Fitch, for not-for-profit health services operators it’s “unsustainable” and “deteriorating.”

Nonetheless, the parallels between the current state of worker sentiment in the U.S. auto manufacturing and healthcare services sectors are instructive. Auto and healthcare workers want job security and higher pay, believing their company executives and boards but corporate profit above their interests and all else. And polls suggest the public’s increasingly sympathetic to worker issues and strikes like the UAW more frequent.

Ultimately, the UAW dispute with the Big Three will be settled. Ultimately, both sides will make concessions. Ultimately, the automakers will pass on their concession costs to their customers while continuing their transitions to electric vehicles.

In health services, operators are unable to pass thru concession costs due to reimbursement constraints that, along with supply chain cost inflation, wipe out earnings and heighten labor tension.  

So, the immediate imperatives for healthcare services organizations seem clear as labor issues mount and economics erode:

  • Educate workers—all workers—is a priority. That includes industry trends and issues in sectors outside the organization’s current focus.
  • Define the future. In healthcare services, innovators will leverage technology and data to re-define including how health is defined, where it’s delivered and by whom. Investments in future-state scenario planning is urgently needed.
  • Address issues head-on: Forthrightness about issues like access, prices, executive compensation, affordability and more is essential to trustworthiness.  

Stay tuned to the UAW strike and consider fresh approaches to labor issues. It’s not a matter of if, but when.

PS: I drive an electric car—my step into the auto industry future state. It took me 9 hours last Thursday to drive 275 miles to my son’s wedding because the infrastructure to support timely battery charges in route was non-existent. Ironically, after one of three self-charges for which I paid more than equivalent gas, I was prompted to “add a tip”. So, the transition to electric vehicles seems certain, but it will be bumpy and workers will be impacted.

The future state for healthcare is equally frought with inadequate charging stations aka “systemness” but it’s inevitable those issues will be settled. And worker job security and labor costs will be significantly impacted in the process.

The 10 major trends impacting health systems in 2023

Posted on by • Posted in Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Market Trends • Leave a comment
https://www.advisory.com/topics/market-trends/2023/08/the-10-major-trends-impacting-health-systems-in-2023?utm_source=acquisition_provider&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=95513&utm_content=trending_x_x_slides_x_10-major-trends-impacting-health-systems_xelqTrackId=ca0a4192ab45456982bbda9646d6d513&elq_cid=4838956&elqcst=272&elqcsid=6757

Learn about the 10 major trends impacting health systems this year — from financial pressures to workforce stability to generative AI. Download these ready-to-use slides to get up to speed on what health system leaders should be watching this year.

OVERVIEW

We’ve updated our ready-to-use slides depicting the most important market forces affecting health systems in 2023. Whether you’re speaking to your board, C-suite, or community, you’ll have access to the latest data and insights, pre-formatted and ready to present for your next presentation.

The 10 major trends:

  1. Health systems bend but do not break in the wake of the worst financial year in recent memory.
  2. Stakeholders align on urgency to rationalize services for long-term sustainability.
  3. Quality suffers as organizations look for workforce stability.
  4. Virtual hospitals rise in popularity to accelerate care model transformation.
  5. Beware vaporware! The hype and reality of generative AI comes into focus.
  6. Mega-corporations make further inroads into care delivery.
  7. Health systems lose the narrative in the public’s eye.
  8. Value-based care hype is tempered by market realities.
  9. Health systems look for new growth pastures to compensate for tepid inpatient surgery growth.
  10. Unlikely alliances take form to counteract common pressures across the health system community.

Download the full deck

Private equity-backed practices flexing market share muscle 

Posted on by • Posted in Antitrust, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), High Prices, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Trends, Mergers & Acquisitions, Physician, Physician Acquisition, Physician Aggregator, Physician Employment, Physician Practice Acquisition, Physician Specialist, Physician Staffing - Private Equity Backed, Private Equity • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/d0e838f6648b/the-weekly-gist-september-8-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

This week we showcase data from a recent American Antitrust Institute study on the growth of private equity (PE)-backed physician practices, and the impact of this growth on market competition and healthcare prices. 

From 2012 to 2021, the annual number of practice acquisitions by private equity groups increased six-fold, especially in high-margin specialties. During this same time period, the number of metropolitan areas in which a single PE-backed practice held over 30 percent market share rose to cover over one quarter of the country. 

These “hyper-concentrated” markets are especially prevalent in less-regulated states with fast-growing senior populations, like Arizona, Texas, and Florida. 

The study also found an association between PE practice acquisitions and higher healthcare prices. In highly concentrated markets, certain specialties, like gastroenterology, were able to raise prices rise by as much as 18 percent. 

While new Federal Trade Commission proposals demonstrate the government’s renewed interest in antitrust enforcement, it may be too little, too late to mitigate the impact of specialist concentration in many states.  

Some states back hospital mergers despite record of service cuts, price hikes

Posted on by • Posted in Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Health System, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Market Trends, Mergers & Acquisitions, Monopoly, Monopoly Behavior • Leave a comment
https://stateline.org/2023/09/07/some-states-back-hospital-mergers-despite-record-of-service-cuts-price-hikes/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Issue:%202023-09-07%20Healthcare%20Dive%20%5Bissue:54287%5D&utm_term=Healthcare%20Dive

In much of the country, a single hospital system now accounts for most hospital admissions.

Some illnesses and injuries — say, a broken ankle — can send you to numerous health care providers. You might start at urgent care but end up in the emergency room. Referred to an orthopedist, you might eventually land in an outpatient surgery center.

Four different stops on your road to recovery. But as supersized health care systems gobble up smaller hospitals and clinics, it’s increasingly likely that all those facilities will be owned by the same corporation.

Hospital trade groups say mergers can save failing hospitals, especially rural ones. But research shows that a lack of competition often leads to fewer services at higher costs. In recent years, federal regulators have been taking a harder look at health care consolidation.

Yet some states, notably those in the South, are paving the way for more mergers.

Mississippi passed a law this year that exempts hospital acquisitions from state antitrust laws, while North Carolina considered legislation to do the same for the University of North Carolina’s health system. Louisiana officials approved a $150 million hospital acquisition late last year that has ignited a legal battle with the Federal Trade Commission over whether they allowed a monopoly.

States including South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia have certificate of public advantage (COPA) laws that let state agencies determine whether hospitals can merge, circumventing federal antitrust laws. And large hospital systems wield significant political power in many state capitals.

‘A tool in the tool belt’

Nearly half of Mississippi’s rural hospitals are at risk of closing, according to a report from the Center for Healthcare Quality & Payment Reform, a nonprofit policy research center.

Mississippi leaders hope easing restrictions on hospital mergers could be a solution. A new law exempts all hospital acquisitions and mergers from state antitrust laws and classifies community hospitals as government entities, making them immune from antitrust enforcement.

We saw primary care offices get shut down. We’ve seen our specialists leave for out of state. Several of the outlying hospitals saw services cut even though they were told it wouldn’t happen.

– Kerri Wilson, a registered nurse in North Carolina

Mississippi, one of the poorest states in the nation, is also one of the least healthy, with high rates of chronic conditions like heart disease and diabetes. It is one of 10 states that haven’t expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, and has one of the nation’s highest percentages of people without health insurance.

“Like many states in a similar socioeconomic status, Mississippi has difficulties with patients that are either not insured or underinsured,” said Ryan Kelly, executive director of the nonprofit Mississippi Rural Health Association. Food insecurity and lack of reliable transportation mean rural residents tend to be sicker and more expensive to treat.

That’s part of the reason why so many Mississippi hospitals operate in the red. The largest hospital in the Mississippi Delta region, Greenwood Leflore, is at immediate risk of closure even after hospital leaders shuttered unit after unit — including labor and delivery, and intensive care — in an effort to remain solvent.

A deal for the University of Mississippi Medical Center to purchase Greenwood Leflore fell through last year. Now, with the new law in effect, the hospital’s owners — the city and county — are soliciting new bidders and offering them the option to buy the hospital outright.

Kelly said he expects to see more Mississippi hospitals consolidate over the coming decade. Some have already had conversations around merger possibilities after the new law went into effect, though talks are in early days.

“It’s a tool in the tool belt,” he said of the new law. “I think it could be a saving grace for some of our hospitals that are perennially struggling but still serve with good purpose. They could be part of a larger system that could help offset their costs so they’re able to be a little leaner but still provide services in their community.”

Leaders in some states think consolidation could solve their health care woes, but studies indicate it has a negative impact.

“There’s a large body of research showing that health care consolidation leads to increases in prices without clear evidence it improves quality,” said Zachary Levinson, a project director at KFF, a nonprofit health care policy research organization, who analyzes the business practices of hospitals and other providers and their impact on costs.

When researchers studied how affiliation with a larger health system affected the number of services a rural hospital offered, they found most of the losses in service occurred in hospitals that joined larger systems, according to a 2023 study from the Rural Policy Research Institute at the University of Iowa.

Even when an acquisition by a larger health system helps a struggling hospital keep its doors open, “there can be potential tradeoffs,” Levinson said.

“There’s some concern that, for example, when a larger health system buys up a smaller independent hospital in a different region, that hospital will become less attentive to the specific needs of the community it serves,” and may cut services the community wants because they’re not deemed profitable enough, he said.

Most research suggests hospital consolidation does lead to higher prices, according to a sweeping 2020 report from MedPAC, an independent congressional agency that advises Congress on issues affecting Medicare. The report found that patients with private insurance pay higher prices for care and for insurance in markets that are dominated by one health care system. And when hospitals acquire physician practices, taxpayer and patient costs can double for some services provided in a physician’s office, the report found.

Kelly said he’s not as concerned with consolidation raising costs for Mississippi’s rural residents because so many qualify for subsidized care, but he does think mergers could eliminate some jobs in the health care sector.

“It’s hard to say for sure,” he said. “It is a risk, no question. But I still think it’s a net positive.”

A ‘hospital cartel’

When HCA Healthcare purchased a North Carolina hospital system in 2019, registered nurse Kerri Wilson wasn’t prepared for how much would change — and how quickly — at her hospital in Asheville.

“Once the sale was final in 2019, that’s when it was like the ball dropped and we started seeing staffing cuts,” said Wilson, an Asheville native who has worked in the cardiology stepdown unit at Mission Hospital since 2016.

“We saw our nurse-patient ratios change,” Wilson said. “We saw primary care offices get shut down. We’ve seen our specialists leave for out of state. Several of the outlying hospitals saw services cut even though they were told it wouldn’t happen.”

In the four years since HCA Healthcare bought Mission Health, North Carolinians have hit the nation’s largest health system with multiple antitrust lawsuits, including one that asserts HCA operates an unlawful health care monopoly through Mission Health, and another filed by city and county governments that says HCA’s corporate practices have decimated local health care options and raised costs.

HCA Healthcare did not immediately respond to a request for comment. However, when the second lawsuit was filed, HCA/Mission Health spokesperson Nancy Lindell called it “meritless.”

“Mission Health has been caring for Western North Carolina for more than 130 years and our dedication to providing excellent health care to our community will not waiver [sic] as we vigorously defend against this meritless litigation,” Lindell said in a statement to the Mountain Xpress newspaper. “We are disappointed in this action and we continue to be proud of the heroic work our team does daily.”

Mission’s nurses voted in 2020 to join National Nurses Organizing Committee, an affiliate of National Nurses United, the nation’s largest nursing union, to advocate for higher pay and safer working conditions.

Meanwhile, North Carolina leaders such as Republican State Treasurer Dale Folwell and Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein have spoken out against HCA’s practices. Folwell likened the merger to a “hospital cartel” and both officials filed amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs in the antitrust lawsuits.

“We have a situation with the cartel-ization of health care in North Carolina where people have to drive miles just to get basic services, and this is unacceptable,” Folwell told Stateline. He said many North Carolinians, particularly those with low incomes, fear seeking medical help because of sky-high medical bills that he said are a result of massive health care systems with little state oversight.

Folwell has publicly criticized the power that the North Carolina Health Care Association, the state’s hospital trade group, wields in the legislature. He calls the group the “leader of the [hospital] cartel.”

Industry groups spent more than $141 million nationwide lobbying state officials on health issues in 2021. And out of that $141 million, the hospital and nursing home industry spent the most, accounting for nearly 1 out of every 4 dollars spent on lobbying state lawmakers over health issues.

“This is not a Republican or Democrat issue,” said Folwell, who has lent his support to a bipartisan bill that would limit the power of large hospitals to charge interest rates and rein in medical debt collection tactics. “It’s a moral issue.”

North Carolina Democratic state Sen. Julie Mayfield, who was on the Asheville City Council when HCA acquired Mission Health, sponsored a bill earlier this year that would have curbed hospital consolidations.

In a social media post introducing the bill, Mayfield said she hoped it would “prevent other communities from suffering what we have suffered in the wake of the Mission sale — loss of nursing and other staff, loss of physicians, closure of facilities, and the resulting lower quality of care many people have experienced in Mission hospitals over the last four years.”

Even the Federal Trade Commission jumped in, urging legislators to “reconsider” a bill that would have greenlighted UNC Health’s expansion, saying it could “lead to patient harm in the form of higher health care costs, lower quality, reduced innovation and reduced access to care.” That bill ultimately failed in the state House, as sentiment among some North Carolina leaders had already soured on hospital mergers.

In most U.S. markets, a single hospital system now accounts for more than half of hospital inpatient admissions. Federal regulators have been scrutinizing health care mergers more carefully in recent years, said KFF’s Levinson. The FTC has both sued and been sued by health care systems in Louisiana this year, and recently released a draft version of new guidelines on anti-competitive practices.

“People have viewed those guidelines as indicating the FTC and [the U.S. Department of Justice] will be more interested in aggressively challenging anti-competitive practices than in the past,” Levinson said.

Both the Trump and Biden administrations issued executive orders directing federal agencies to focus on promoting competition in health care markets. President Joe Biden’s order noted that “hospital consolidation has left many areas, particularly rural communities, with inadequate or more expensive healthcare options.”

In Mississippi, the hospital mergers law received widespread support from most of the state’s GOP leaders. But the state’s far-right Freedom Caucus came out against it, with Republican state Rep. Dana Criswell, the chair of the caucus, calling it “an attempt at a complete government takeover” of Mississippi’s hospitals.

Criswell said allowing the University of Mississippi Medical Center to buy smaller hospitals “will create a huge government protected monopoly, driving out competition and ultimately putting private hospitals out of business.”

‘Trying something different’

Wilson, the Asheville nurse, said she used to have three or four patients per shift before the merger; now she typically has five. That gives her an average of 10 minutes per patient per hour. It’s not enough time, she said, to give patients their medication, answer questions and perform other tasks that she said nurses often take on because other departments are short-staffed.

Sometimes, she said, those tasks include helping patients go to the bathroom because there aren’t enough nursing assistants or taking out the trash because of a shortage of cleaning staff. Meanwhile, the waiting rooms are overflowing.

Wilson joined the new Mission Hospital nurses union, which was able to negotiate raises for its members. The union continues to protest working conditions, including staff-patient ratios.

But Kelly, of the Mississippi Rural Health Association, said that in his state, mergers are an opportunity for positive change.

“It’s not like health care in Mississippi is at the top of the list for good things,” he said. “I think this is an example of trying something different and seeing if it works.”